• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral


Are other people really have less iq than me or is this just another "thing" of being an aspie? I excessively feel like all the other people are bunch of gorillas that can somehow talk my language. I surely can't control this feeling, it is annoying and it is making my life harder.
Innerly, i don't want to waste my time talking with someone; trying to explain myself or maybe defending myself. Sometimes i'm like, "is it really worth it?". I think it's easy to relate, you can get what i'm trying to say and how is it making my life harder.
What do you think?
My iq is over 160. Most likely don't even have autism. I am just too intelligent to be functional and be able to socialize properly.
Last edited:
Most Aspies are in the ‘genius’ range of I.Q. It’s not just you. The average iq is 100. That’s the base established when the iq scale was invented.

You’re not crazy just smart. And yes, I feel like the smartest person in the room every day. And I constantly find that it gets proven when I understand stuff that nobody else can figure out.
And I constantly find that it gets proven when I understand stuff that nobody else can figure out.
The thing annoys most of is that when i understand stuff that nobody else could, i keep it to myself. I just wait and when eventually someone else figures it out, i'm feeling... awkward, can't explain it. And i can't help this, i never have the motivation to explain what i just figured out.
I'm in mensa. But if you talked to me verbally, I sound pretty vacant. People don't take me seriously because of it.

Last edited:
Your profile says you're 17, so I'm saying this as someone who was also 17 once (obviously, I didn't just like somehow skip from 16 to 18 years old) and also once had very similar feelings when I was in my teens: you are not as smart as you think you are.

I'm pretty sure I have a high IQ, I was tested and placed in gifted and advanced classes growing up in school and I've always felt a disconnect with a lot of my peers, even to this day. But I also don't know or care what my IQ is because, to quote the late Stephen Hawking, 'People who boast about their IQ are losers'.
I thought my whole life that my IQ, which I got tested not long ago and the result was above the ranges, was so high that it made it difficult to be understood. Maybe it does, but maybe that's "just" autism, which I learnt that I have like a month ago.

But high school is tough in terms of finding friends, I have to say. And in terms of being understood.
I’ve never been tested, but I am confident I fall squarely in the average range.

The capacity to learn feels more valuable than inherent intelligence to me.
I never been tested nor do I care about my true iq number. Intelligence is niches and one test cannot prove the plasticity and crystallized intelligence of one’s innate capacity.

Communicating is supposed to be about transference of pertinent information or sharing knowledge or wisdom or conjuring up ideas to improve a process or environment.

Everyone uses it to seek adulation, complain about 1st world problems, weather, football, everyday common nuances that are all comprised of social platitudes, niceties, sycophantic, and all sprinkled with deceptive, non linear endings with euphemism and expressions that ooze emotion.

Then when you talk to people and they start to speak about their personal life or some iteration from my above description you have to multitask in your head because you already know the end of the conversation and you need more engagement by assessing other problems not related to the conversation to stay engaged.

Then you essentially alienate yourself from everyone because conversations are not engaging at all and always indirect. So you do more listening and observing and when you speak people actually listen.
Iq is somehow controversial when it really shouldn't be. God know why everyone feels the need to define it differently or bring up points like "iq doesn't matter when you don't work hard enough" or "i have genius iq but i am actually really dumb irl so it doesn't mean anything" and "there is emotional intelligence too". It makes me cringe.
Intelligence is a spectrum, just as autism is. Peak and valley learning profiles are often par for the course, usually associated with certain processing deficits (e.g. dyslexia, dyscalculia, dysphonentic readers (sight and context readers), auditory processing disorders, etc...). And a large number of NDer usually struggle with at least on of these deficits.

Something as baseline as the differences between visual and verbal processors can also have a huge impact on how 'intelligent' someone can appear. According to standard metrics, I could not read, write, or do math. I was unteachable by the school's metrics because I processed information in a unique way. According to school reports I was very, very stupid. Standardized metric tests and other tools argued otherwise.

I can't sound out words and invert numbers when I speak them. This would/could define me as stupid. (Critical failure of two major first principle skills.) Thusly, fitting into the inferior intelligence category, is it plausible for me to contribute effectively to a complex conversation? Statistics and the Dunning-Kruger Effect would say no.

Intelligence is a tool. What matters is how one uses it. Not how it is measured. It is the difference between an active learning process and passive memorization and regurgitation. Practical and/or effective application of accrued information versus technical (testable) proficiency. (Essentially real world usability versus the academic sphere).

As Dr. Jones once said: 'If you want to be a good archaeologist you need to get out of the library.'
Last edited:
It may be more like you are on a different frequency. People not getting what you say/mean does not necessarily mean they are less intelligent so much as not understanding as you speak something like a different language.

Communication is something of a skill or art even.
Intelligence is a spectrum
I was genuinely blown away by the last 5 or 6 responses. I made myself pick something to respond to but this one was the easiest.

If a person is great with growing plants, we say they have a ‘green thumb’. If they’re good with math, society calls them a nerd. Good with children? Make them a kindergarten teacher.

Aspies are good, even great, with stuff that NT’s struggle with. We are labeled as ‘different’ (or worse). We are trying to define ourselves with their words which are meant to push the most selfish in our society to the top. Maybe there needs to be different words.

I’m great with math and mechanical stuff, but I totally fail at social skills. The standard IQ tests focus on math and science stuff, so of course I excel at those tests. THE TEST IS FLAWED. I’m not smarter than everyone or at everything, just the things the test focuses on. What we’re talking about here is a person’s ability to learn and how much they have learned appropriately to their age.

When a person stops learning, that’s when they start becoming stupid. Most Aspies have no choice to keep learning because society will murder then if they don’t adapt. Intelligence is a fluid and constantly changing process. There’s really no way to put a number on that.
Last edited:

New Threads

Top Bottom